07.02.2015 Views

Educing Information: Interrogation - National Intelligence University

Educing Information: Interrogation - National Intelligence University

Educing Information: Interrogation - National Intelligence University

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Second, there is the tactical error of assuming that a source’s level of resistance<br />

is directly correlated with his level of knowledgeability. While common sense<br />

might suggest a logic inherent in this assumption, reality will quickly correct it.<br />

Resistance is the direct product of several key factors: training, life experience,<br />

personality, commitment to a cause, deep-seated feelings about the interrogator<br />

and/or his country of origin, and even anger at the manner in which the source has<br />

been treated since capture. Any one of these can lead the truck driver to protect the<br />

already compromised route he was to drive during an operation more fiercely than<br />

a less-motivated nuclear engineer will protect the key to disabling a radioactive<br />

dispersal device. 79<br />

Nobody Loves You<br />

An interrogatee who is withholding items of no grave<br />

consequence to himself may sometimes be persuaded to talk by<br />

the simple tactic of pointing out that to date all of the information<br />

about his case has come from persons other than himself. The<br />

interrogator wants to be fair. He recognizes that some of the<br />

denouncers may have been biased or malicious…the source<br />

owes it to himself to be sure that the interrogator hears both<br />

sides of the story. 80<br />

(See observations under next heading.)<br />

Joint Suspects<br />

If two or more interrogation sources are suspected of joint<br />

complicity in acts directed against U.S. security, they should<br />

be separated immediately. If time permits, it may be a good<br />

idea (depending upon the psychological assessment of both) to<br />

postpone interrogation for about a week. Any anxious inquiries<br />

from either can be met with a knowing grin and some such reply<br />

as, “We’ll get to you in due time. There’s no hurry now.” 81<br />

The primary difference between these two approaches is that in the first the<br />

source is presented with evidence — largely implicit — that other, unnamed,<br />

unknown (to the source), and as yet unseen detainees have provided information<br />

that reflects negatively upon him, while in the second scenario the interrogator<br />

refers directly to damaging information gathered from other detainees known to<br />

the source.<br />

Leveraging one source against another is a common police tactic (the central<br />

idea of the classic “prisoner’s dilemma”) and is especially useful when dealing<br />

79<br />

A radioactive dispersal device is often referred to in the media and in popular literature as a<br />

“dirty bomb.”<br />

80<br />

KUBARK, 67.<br />

81<br />

KUBARK, 70.<br />

125

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!